1. Harmonization process between inventory and Model projections of Air Pollution Emissions in Italy 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006 T. Pignatelli,G. Vialetto, I. D’Elia T. Pignatelli, G. Vialetto, I. D’EliaENEA M. Contaldi, R. De Lauretis APAT Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment

2. International and National Context In the frame of the EU Directive In the frame of the EU Directive 2001/81/EC (NEC) and for the purposes of the Gothenburg Protocol under the UN- ECE Convention on Long Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP). At national level, in the frame of the techno-scientific support to the Italian Ministry for the Environment, and Local Authorities, At national level, in the frame of the techno-scientific support to the Italian Ministry for the Environment, and Local Authorities, for environment policy development. ENEA, in cooperation with other national agencies (APAT) and experts, develops emission scenarios and environment/health impact analyses. Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006

3. Integrated Assessment Modelling Tool Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006

4. Rains-Italy Model Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment Simplified flow chart RAINS-Italy  Economic Activities  Energy Scenario  Emission scenarios  Cost Curves  Deposition maps  Concentration maps  Impact on Environment and Health InputOutput  CONTROL STRATEGY (Abatement technologies) 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006

5. Harmonization means: Emissions calculated, at the reference year (2000), in Inventory and in the Model analysis, must be consistent Harmonization between Inventory and Model calculations The need for harmonization is due to: The Model must be validated through comparison with an independent reference. The robustness of the model projections is strictly related with the consistency, within an acceptable uncertainty margin, between inventory and model calculation. Since the harmonization is a common practice in the frame of the EU and UN-ECE analyses, for comparison purposes, the harmonization is therefore opportune. Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006

6. Emission Calculation in the RAINS-Italy Model Harmonization Methodology: Differences in Emission Calculation E = Σ j Σ k Act j * Ef j * (1 – ŋ jk ) * Af jk (1 – ŋ jk ) * Af jk = Residual emissions after abatement, by technology k in sector j E = Act j * EF j E j = Act j * EF j EF j = Total Emission Factor (abatement included) in sector j Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment Act j = Activity level in sector j Ef j = Unabated Emission Factor per unit of activity level, in sector j Emission Calculation in Inventory 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006

7. Applied to those sectors where greater mismatches are observed, till an acceptable gap is achieved (usually <5~6% on total emissions) Flow chart Equivalence in activity levels Consistency between Total Emission Factors Adjustment of non-abated Emission Factors (country-specific) Assessment of Emission consistency Adjustment of the Control Strategy (Tech penetration rates) Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment Harmonization Process 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006

8. Differences between Inventory and Model methodology 2) Some sources are considered in RAINS and NOT in the Inventory (or viceversa). Livestock emissions: rabbits were considered in the national inventory but not in the RAINS-IT model Sources NOT included in the PM 10 Inventory (kton) : Handling & Storage 1,8 Agriculture 14,9 Small Industry 9,1 Other (BBQ, Constr., Firew., Smoking) 11,2 Total 37,2 Invent.+Sources NOT incl. 217,12 Difference (5,9%) 13,66 Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment Harmonization Methodology (1) 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006 1) RAINS sectors have a higher level of aggregation with respect the SNAP Codes and very often there is no correspondence (e.g. INDUSTRIAL COMBUSTION sector: 2 sub- sectors in RAINS for the whole SNAP03 code).

9. 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006 Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment Harmonization Methodology (2) Differences between Inventory and Model methodology 4) In few cases RAINS sectors have a higher level of details with respect the SNAP Codes and a compromise is not always easy achievable (ex. the PRINTING sector for NMVOC emission calculation). 3) In some cases for the same source a different activity level is considered in the RAINS model with respect the national inventory (ex. the DRY CLEANING sector for NMVOC emission calculation: the RAINS activity level is the ktons of clothes while the national inventory activity level is the number of dry cleaning machines). RAINS sourcesSNAP code Printing offset060304 Printing offset, new installations060304 Flexography and rotogravure in packaging060304 Flexography and rotogravure in packaging, new installations060304 Rotogravure in publication060304 Rotogravure in publication, new installations060304 Screen printing060304 Screen printing, new installations060304 Same SNAP code for different RAINS sources

10. Harmonization results for Italy at the year 2000 Max gap (PM 10 ) = 5,9 % Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006

11. NEC Directive Review Process National Emission Scenarios by RAINS-IT Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment SO 2 CLE Emission Scenario (kt/year) 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006 NEC target: 475 kton

12. Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment NH 3 CLE Emission Scenario (kt/year) NEC Directive Review Process National Emission Scenarios by RAINS-IT 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006 NEC target: 419 kton

13. Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment VOC CLE Emission Scenario (kt/year) NEC Directive Review Process National Emission Scenarios by RAINS-IT 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006 NEC target: 1159 kton

14. Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment NEC Directive Review Process National Emission Scenarios by RAINS-IT PM 10 CLE Emission Scenario (kt/year) 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006

15. Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment NEC Directive Review Process National Emission Scenarios by RAINS-IT NO x CLE Emission Scenario (kt/year) 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006 NEC target: 990 kton

16. Main methodological changes 1) Review of the removal efficiencies of the abatement technologies applied to road light & heavy duty vehicles 2) Different share in the fuel consumptions in the maritime transport sector, starting from the year 2000. Compliance with the NO x emission ceiling 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006

17. Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment Compliance with the NO x emission ceiling Re-calculated NOx projection at 2010 1998 NEC Directive parameters 2006 NEC Review parametersDifference NO x emissions from road vehicles (TRA_RD kton) 303425 + 122 NO x emissions from Ships 2010 (TRA_OTS kton) 31101 + 70 NO emissions projection at 2010 NO x emissions projection at 2010865*1057*+192 (*)2010 NOx Target for Italy 990 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006

18. Conclusions 1) The harmonization between Inventory and Model emission calculation is needed for the purposes of the international and national policy analyses, also increasing the robustness of the projections 2) Methodological differences exist between Inventory and Model calculations. By a careful comparison analysis, sector by sector, an acceptable level of consistency can be achieved. 3) Such comparison provides useful indications to improve the quality of both the Inventory and the Model output. Italian Agency for New Technology Energy and the Environment 30-31 October, TFEIP Workshop on Emission Projections – Thessaloniki, 30-31 October, 2006 4) The Emission Projection Analysis, in Italy, shows a condition of NEC compliance for SO, NH, VOC and possible incompliance for NO, pending issues concerning the changes occurred in methodology 4) The Emission Projection Analysis, in Italy, shows a condition of NEC compliance for SO 2, NH 3, VOC and possible incompliance for NO x, pending issues concerning the changes occurred in methodology